Why Can't I Uncastle a Castle ?
Sort:
[COMMENT DELETED]
Jul 20, 2017
0
#602
Regarding Koenig's assertion (4) up....
Losing the right to castle w/ Bf7 sacrifice means u would not be able to uncastle then, right ?
IOW's, to uncastle one must have had to initially castle.
Jul 20, 2017
0
#603
What has always been the basis of my argument is:
Castling is a made up move from yesteryear. Probably to satisfy someone like the Wizard of Id's King. It's a joke in that I can make a case to where it actually does not belong in modern day chess.
So. I'm okay here. Let us accept castling w/out question. Therefore, if castling is made up ?....then what would stop Uncastling from being viable ?
It will enrich the endgame & probably explode the mind of the nascient wannabe....kinda like en passant does.
Jul 20, 2017
0
#604
Chess is about paying attention, right ?
If u suffer from low-level doses of ADD (add asplasha hyperstate as it concocts w/ a maitai) like I do, then getting screamed at in my face by a older brother barking "PAY ATTENTION !!" means something & was my medicine at the time.
BTW, I now use it as a excuse for substandard grades in skool....& other whatnots.
I never had prob with the original idea
obviously you will not be allowed to play an uncastle in tourney OTB chess; no matter what the history of castling.
but people are so anal around here. why the BIG year long argument that SOMEONE thinks that uncastling should be allowed!
also arguing out the little details is just missing the big point. the big point is that you should be allowed to have that opinion.
.... the same applies (even more) to your other thread about smoother mate. if my opinion only includes knights and your does not- the world DOESN'T end
Jul 20, 2017
0
#606
TY again tgp !!....I sense that u may not on board w/ me in either case, but I'm okay w/ that. You're one a the few who don't diss me 'cuz we're not lining up regarding FIDE rules & accepted definitions....
....
[COMMENT DELETED]
Why can't you uncastle. For the same reason that you can't move your king 5 squares away and for the same reason why you can't move your pawn 7 squares in one move.
Its in the rules. Why are they the rules and not something else the rules. Hell if I know. However you are free to start your own Chess Federation where the rules permit you to uncastle. Also start a website while you are at it where the software allows for uncastling.
Jul 20, 2017
0
#609
Lola writes:
So. I'm okay here. Let us accept castling w/out question. Therefore, if castling is made up ?....then what would stop Uncastling from being viable ?
----------
You realize every single rule in the game is simply made up, right?
So. I'm okay here. Let us accept castling w/out question. Therefore, if castling is made up ?....then what would stop Uncastling from being viable ?
----------
You realize every single rule in the game is simply made up, right?
Guys stop being so mean to The_Ghostess_Lola, it's just a question, jeez.
Guys stop being so mean to The_Ghostess_Lola, it's just a question, jeez.
i love trolling in chess which means to use tricks to win pieces
Jul 20, 2017
0
#613
1818-1828271 wrote:
Lola writes:
So. I'm okay here. Let us accept castling w/out question. Therefore, if castling is made up ?....then what would stop Uncastling from being viable ?
----------
You realize every single rule in the game is simply made up, right?
So. I'm okay here. Let us accept castling w/out question. Therefore, if castling is made up ?....then what would stop Uncastling from being viable ?
----------
You realize every single rule in the game is simply made up, right?
Not so fast there buster.
Castling was a afterthought. The game was rationally created with each piece's ability to move back from whence it once was - ad infinitum.
Ex: pawn, tho' pawn consolation prize is promotion. So, makes sense.
See how logic breaks w/ ugly inconsistency from all the other moves ?....Remember, King & Rook both have shuttling capability due to their defined piece movement.
Castling is extrinsic &, no doubt, should be move temporal.
Jul 20, 2017
0
#614
sworp wrote:
Guys stop being so mean to The_Ghostess_Lola, it's just a question, jeez.
TY sworp, tho' sadly we're beginning to take the escalator to personal Level One 
.
Jul 20, 2017
0
#615
Yes, there is a logical reason that the rules were made, but they were still made up.
There is no objective reason why some rules don't exist and others do. It's just down to what people thought made the game the most fun.
Uncastling doesn't seem to add anything to the game, and using a "consistency in logic" argument for it just makes absolutely no sense when the rules are completely arbitrary.
There is no objective reason why some rules don't exist and others do. It's just down to what people thought made the game the most fun.
Uncastling doesn't seem to add anything to the game, and using a "consistency in logic" argument for it just makes absolutely no sense when the rules are completely arbitrary.
DIE THREAD DIEEEEEEEEEEEE!
Jul 20, 2017
0
#617
I swear Lola doesn't even care if she can justify her position with logic, she's just going with some random idea and arguing with people over it, refusing to admit her own faults while calling out others for their huge egos.
That irritates me more than anything else about this whole debate.
That irritates me more than anything else about this whole debate.
Jul 20, 2017
0
#618
(#745) Uncastling doesn't seem to add anything to the game, and using a "consistency in logic" argument for it just makes absolutely no sense when the rules are completely arbitrary.
Doncha see ?....neither does Castling ! The pro-side would be one expels tempi to render an attack at the expense of leaving your king exposed like he was at a defrocked colony. Tho' if I was playing Bobby Fischer ?....even he couldn't stop me from castling....ever. I could do it on the 4rd move & he couldn't ever do anything about it (plus he'd be giving me knight odds).
if you got all your pieces out, could you castle kingside as a fake out, then uncastle, then finally castle queenside with these new rules? Once the king moves you can no longer castle, and castling is a rule, so uncastling would imply that your king has not moved but to uncastle you must first have castled, therefore contradiction.
I think the idea would be fun btw, to take two moves to create an opposite castle attack in a lame middle game.
